FUNKNET Digest, Vol 96, Issue 4
Randy LaPolla
r.lapolla at latrobe.edu.au
Sat Sep 10 00:59:02 UTC 2011
Linguistics has been seen as limited in its usefulness because of the idea that linguistics is simply about language, and also the idea that language is a "thing" divorced from other things related to human behaviour (using phrases such as "right-edge phenomena" in talking about word or phrase-final phenomena, i.e. thinking about language simply as phonetic symbols on paper, shows how far some parts of linguistics have moved from actual language use). As Grice hinted at in his 1957 article "Meaning" and I have tried to develop more fully (LaPolla 2003, 2010), language is not a "thing", but a form of behaviour, and the same cognitive abilities and tendencies and many of the same principles that underly communicative behaviour (which is also not limited to language use) underly other aspects of human behaviour, so understanding communicative behaviour (which I think is what linguistics should be about) helps us to understand other aspects of human behaviour. When I teach this view in my classes, students can see clearly the relevance of linguistics to everyday life; as one student put it in a recent evaluation, "linguistics is everywhere!".
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. Meaning. The Philosophical Review 66.3: 377-388.
LaPolla, Randy J. 2003. Why languages differ: Variation in the conventionalization of constraints on inference. In David Bradley, Randy J. LaPolla, Boyd Michailovsky & Graham Thurgood (eds.), Language variation: Papers on variation and change in the Sinosphere and in the Indosphere in honour of James A. Matisoff, 113-144. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
<http://tibeto-burman.net/rjlapolla/papers/whylgsdiffer.pdf>
LaPolla, Randy J. 2010. On the logical necessity of a cultural connection for all aspects of linguistic structure. 10th RCLT International Workshop, “The Shaping of Language”, La Trobe University, 14, July 2010. Downloadable podcast and handout: http://itunes.apple.com/au/itunes-u/the-shaping-of-language/id391930814
Randy
---
Randy J. LaPolla, PhD FAHA
Professor (Chair) of Linguistics
La Trobe University
VIC 3086 AUSTRALIA
Personal site: http://tibeto-burman.net/rjlapolla/
RCLT: http://www.latrobe.edu.au/rclt/
The Tibeto-Burman Domain: http://tibeto-burman.net/
Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area: http://stedt.berkeley.edu/ltba/
On 10/09/2011, at 3:00 AM, <funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu> wrote:
> Send FUNKNET mailing list submissions to
> funknet at mailman.rice.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/funknet
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> funknet-request at mailman.rice.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> funknet-owner at mailman.rice.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of FUNKNET digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Johanna Rubba)
> 2. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> (john at research.haifa.ac.il)
> 3. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Angus Grieve-Smith)
> 4. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Sherman Wilcox)
> 5. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Tahir Wood)
> 6. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Henrik Rosenkvist)
> 7. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (alex gross)
> 8. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Rong Chen)
> 9. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Daniel Ria?o)
> 10. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Hancock, Craig G)
> 11. Re: What is linguistics? What is it good for? (Clai Rice)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:35:11 -0700
> From: Johanna Rubba <jrubba at calpoly.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: s.t. bischoff <bischoff.st at gmail.com>
> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <817F8183-6B1F-4187-BEBC-02F508F66046 at calpoly.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
>
> My take:
>
> Linguists strive to understand the thing that enables all of human
> culture: language. Without language, we could not work together. We
> could not plan. We could not refer to the past, the future, the
> hypothetical, or the abstract. We could not describe in detail our
> individual thoughts, emotions, needs, beliefs, or desires. In other
> words, we would live like other primates.
>
> So one thing linguistics is good for is a detailed understanding of
> how this amazing system works. And that is good for advancing the
> understanding of human nature.
>
> Linguistics is good for collecting the data (descriptions of as many
> of the world's languages as possible) we use to develop that
> understanding.
>
> Linguistics is also good for a large number of practical
> applications: assessing children's language development; teaching
> native and non-native languages; correcting popular myths about
> language that cause social harm or ill-conceived policies and
> practices; working with computer science to develop software that can
> use language as humans do; detecting ideological and social
> assumptions as revealed through language; developing literacy and
> language-preservation programs for non-literate cultures and
> threatened cultures; aiding in the detection, diagnosis, and
> treatment of congenital or acquired language disorders; working with
> developers of computer-mediated translation; helping solve crimes
> through forensic linguistics, etc., etc.
>
> Don't know if anyone would want to hear a long list, but, since a lot
> of people don't know what linguistics is or what it's good for, it
> could be informative.
>
> Dr. Johanna Rubba, Ph. D. "Justice is what love looks like
> Professor, Linguistics in public." Cornel West
> Linguistics Minor Advisor
> English Dept.
> Cal Poly State University San Luis Obispo
> San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
> Ofc. tel. : 805-756-2184
> Dept. tel.: 805-756-2596
> Dept. fax: 805-756-6374
> E-mail: jrubba at calpoly.edu
> URL: http://cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 21:08:43 +0300
> From: john at research.haifa.ac.il
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: "s.t. bischoff" <bischoff.st at gmail.com>
> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <1315505323.4e6904ab7304a at webmail.haifa.ac.il>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1255
>
> Next month I'm going to be making a trip to South Sudan (independent in July) to
> give a series of lectures on language policy, orthography development, and
> language standardization. Africa is an absolute mess in terms of literacy
> because of ill-advised language policies and inadequate language development.
> It seems to me that this is something that linguistics is definitely good for.
> John
>
>
>
> Quoting "s.t. bischoff" <bischoff.st at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been asked by my Dean to give a talk which he has titled "What is
>> linguistics? What is it good for?". This talk will be given to a general
>> audience of faculty, students, and administrators. I have several ideas how
>> to approach this, but I wanted to ask folks how they might go about
>> answering the two questions in the title in such a situation.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shannon
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Webmail Program of Haifa University
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:08:56 -0400
> From: Angus Grieve-Smith <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <4E695918.5010004 at panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> On 9/8/2011 12:04 PM, s.t. bischoff wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been asked by my Dean to give a talk which he has titled "What is
>> linguistics? What is it good for?". This talk will be given to a general
>> audience of faculty, students, and administrators. I have several ideas how
>> to approach this, but I wanted to ask folks how they might go about
>> answering the two questions in the title in such a situation.
>>
>
> In my intro classes, I have a slide titled "Who uses linguistics,
> anyway?" with the following list.
>
> * Linguists
> * Computer programmers
> * Speech therapists
> * Language teachers
> * Literary theorists
> * Editors
> * Lexicographers
> * Politicians
>
> I go through each group briefly and talk about how they use
> linguistics. I have a similar slide for phonetics, and I should
> probably make one for each of the other subfields.
>
> --
> -Angus B. Grieve-Smith
> grvsmth at panix.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 19:24:40 -0600
> From: Sherman Wilcox <wilcox at unm.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: Angus Grieve-Smith <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <880607E0-FCF1-48AB-AFE7-2DAFCE3694C4 at unm.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Sep 8, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Angus Grieve-Smith wrote:
>
>> * Linguists
>> * Computer programmers
>> * Speech therapists
>> * Language teachers
>> * Literary theorists
>> * Editors
>> * Lexicographers
>> * Politicians
>
>
> Interpreters and translators.
>
> --
> Sherman Wilcox, Ph.D.
> Professor
> Department of Linguistics
> University of New Mexico
> Albuquerque, NM 87131
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:16:28 +0200
> From: "Tahir Wood" <twood at uwc.ac.za>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: <FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu>
> Message-ID: <4E69D96C.1F1D.0069.1 at uwc.ac.za>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi
>
> I think there should be a purely humane concern underlying linguistics, in addition to the more pragmatic concerns that have been mentioned. The humanities, I think, pose such questions as:
> What do we have in common?
> Where do we differ?
> Why do we differ?
>
> It seems to me that the human awareness of self is an end in itself, and linguistics is and should be part of this vast enterprise (enterprise in the sense of adventure). It is not just about adding value in the marketplace.
>
> Tahir
>
>
>>>> "s.t. bischoff" <bischoff.st at gmail.com> 9/8/2011 6:04 pm >>>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been asked by my Dean to give a talk which he has titled "What is
> linguistics? What is it good for?". This talk will be given to a general
> audience of faculty, students, and administrators. I have several ideas how
> to approach this, but I wanted to ask folks how they might go about
> answering the two questions in the title in such a situation.
>
> Thanks,
> Shannon
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/emaildisclaimer
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:28:37 +0200
> From: Henrik Rosenkvist <Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <4E69C025.3060707 at nordlund.lu.se>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>
> Hi!
>
> Linguistics is a human enterprise. Ants have workers, engineers and so
> forth, but you don't find artists, historians or linguists in an ant
> hill. We are the only species that feel a need to explore ourselves and
> that have the means to do so ? in my view, the capacities for
> introspection etc that we have at hand infer almost an obligation to
> boldly go where no other species can go. And linguistics is one way of
> doing just that.
>
> Henrik R.
>
> Tahir Wood skrev:
>> Hi
>>
>> I think there should be a purely humane concern underlying linguistics, in addition to the more pragmatic concerns that have been mentioned. The humanities, I think, pose such questions as:
>> What do we have in common?
>> Where do we differ?
>> Why do we differ?
>>
>> It seems to me that the human awareness of self is an end in itself, and linguistics is and should be part of this vast enterprise (enterprise in the sense of adventure). It is not just about adding value in the marketplace.
>>
>> Tahir
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> "s.t. bischoff" <bischoff.st at gmail.com> 9/8/2011 6:04 pm >>>
>>>>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been asked by my Dean to give a talk which he has titled "What is
>> linguistics? What is it good for?". This talk will be given to a general
>> audience of faculty, students, and administrators. I have several ideas how
>> to approach this, but I wanted to ask folks how they might go about
>> answering the two questions in the title in such a situation.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shannon
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> All Email originating from UWC is covered by disclaimer http://www.uwc.ac.za/emaildisclaimer
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Henrik Rosenkvist
> docent, nordiska spr?k
> Spr?k- och litteraturcentrum
> Lunds universitet
> Box 201
> 221 00 Lund
> tel: 046-222 87 04
> e-post: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se
>
> Henrik Rosenkvist
> Associate Professor, Scandinavian Languages
> Dept. of Languages and Literature
> Lund University
> P. O. Box 201, SE-221 00 Lund, SWEDEN
> Tel.: +46 46 222 87 04
> E-mail: Henrik.Rosenkvist at nordlund.lu.se
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 06:25:58 -0400
> From: "alex gross" <language at sprynet.com>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: "Sherman Wilcox" <wilcox at unm.edu>, "Angus Grieve-Smith"
> <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <AA634D50EEF344D58080555CD0C1D695 at aa82807a474cf4>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> I applaud all of your contributions so far and would only add that past
> theories of linguistics, were they still fashionable, could provide yet
> other evidence that our study is not only "good for something" but truly
> lies at the very center of our many cultures.
>
> The Semanticists certainly took this view when they visualized linguistics
> as a tool we surely need today, nothing less than an ongoing critique of all
> social, political, and intellectual dialogue, as a way citizens in many
> societies could distinguish rhetoric from reality.
>
> And the Whorf-Sapir descriptivists have also left us a useful tool that can
> help us to realize that seemingly distinct cultures and languages, though
> certainly not connected by any "universal grammar," can nonetheless be seen
> as ultimately comparable and equal in value to our own. At least this
> assessment, though allegedly discredited, still lurks on the margins of our
> study.
>
> I am particularly heartened by Professor Wilcox' contribution, that
> translators and interpreters also prove that linguistics is "good for
> something." I am prepared at the drop of a hat to go a great deal further
> and assert that they lie at the very heart of all language study, as I have
> done in my paper "Translation as the Prototype of All Communication,"
> accessible at:
>
> http://languag2.home.sprynet.com/f/prototyp.htm#t11
>
> It may well be in all the stages of our learning that every single new word
> or concept we encounter, even in our primary language, actually requires an
> act of explanation, enlightenment, clarification--in short translation--for
> us to understand it. Such an act may be provided by a teacher, a helpful
> friend, a dictionary or other reference book, or the closer reading of a
> text. But whatever form it takes, such an act of translation is most often
> absolutely crucial for us to grasp the meaning. And we ourselves--what we
> call our "knowledge" and our "understanding"--may be to a fair extent the
> sum total of these countless acts of translation.
>
> With very best to everyone!
>
> alex
>
> http://language.home.sprynet.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sherman Wilcox" <wilcox at unm.edu>
> To: "Angus Grieve-Smith" <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Cc: <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
>
>
>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Angus Grieve-Smith wrote:
>>
>>> * Linguists
>>> * Computer programmers
>>> * Speech therapists
>>> * Language teachers
>>> * Literary theorists
>>> * Editors
>>> * Lexicographers
>>> * Politicians
>>
>>
>> Interpreters and translators.
>>
>> --
>> Sherman Wilcox, Ph.D.
>> Professor
>> Department of Linguistics
>> University of New Mexico
>> Albuquerque, NM 87131
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:18:39 -0700
> From: Rong Chen <rchen at csusb.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu
> Message-ID: <006c01cc6f03$c0a29fd0$41e7df70$@edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi all,
>
> Dovetailing Tahir's post: Linguistics is also a window into the human mind.
>
> Human beings have a natural urge to learn about things. Among the things we
> want to know (about)--which is practically everything--are things about
> ourselves. Among the things about ourselves is the way our mind works. One
> might even argue that the mind is the most important aspect about us.
>
> Many disciplines study the mind, approaching it from a multitude of
> perspectives. Linguistics is one of them. By studying language, it offers
> insights about how the mind works that no other disciplines is capable of
> offering.
>
> Sorry if this point has been made.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rong Chen
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu
> [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of Tahir Wood
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 12:16 AM
> To: FUNKNET at listserv.rice.edu
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
>
> Hi
>
> I think there should be a purely humane concern underlying linguistics, in
> addition to the more pragmatic concerns that have been mentioned. The
> humanities, I think, pose such questions as:
> What do we have in common?
> Where do we differ?
> Why do we differ?
>
> It seems to me that the human awareness of self is an end in itself, and
> linguistics is and should be part of this vast enterprise (enterprise in the
> sense of adventure). It is not just about adding value in the marketplace.
>
> Tahir
>
>
>>>> "s.t. bischoff" <bischoff.st at gmail.com> 9/8/2011 6:04 pm >>>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been asked by my Dean to give a talk which he has titled "What is
> linguistics? What is it good for?". This talk will be given to a general
> audience of faculty, students, and administrators. I have several ideas how
> to approach this, but I wanted to ask folks how they might go about
> answering the two questions in the title in such a situation.
>
> Thanks,
> Shannon
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 17:22:50 +0200
> From: Daniel Ria?o <danielrr2 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: Sherman Wilcox <wilcox at unm.edu>
> Cc: Angus Grieve-Smith <grvsmth at panix.com>, funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Message-ID:
> <CAA+TPtR-XzhgEtLaz+=s3Un1Cm7PpYbEV+hdwdkgc-rTUrBJ5Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Cognitive scientists, even outside cognitive linguistics,
> Philologists, Ancient (and modern) historians, biologists and the
> folks who occasionally chance upon a new species & have to find a
> Greek or Latin name for it, ehhh, writers (and script-writers) trying
> to make up a new language, ah, no they hire a linguist instead
>
>
> 2011/9/9 Sherman Wilcox <wilcox at unm.edu>:
>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Angus Grieve-Smith wrote:
>>
>>> * Linguists
>>> * Computer programmers
>>> * Speech therapists
>>> * Language teachers
>>> * Literary theorists
>>> * Editors
>>> * Lexicographers
>>> * Politicians
>>
>>
>> Interpreters and translators.
>>
>> --
>> Sherman Wilcox, Ph.D.
>> Professor
>> Department of Linguistics
>> University of New Mexico
>> Albuquerque, NM 87131
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 11:52:12 -0400
> From: "Hancock, Craig G" <chancock at albany.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: alex gross <language at sprynet.com>, Sherman Wilcox
> <wilcox at unm.edu>, Angus Grieve-Smith <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Cc: "funknet at mailman.rice.edu" <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID:
> <F40FC1AE6A9A4040ADA52FC8864BB10E220ED18429 at UAEXCH07.univ.albany.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> As somewhat of an affectionate outsider--with primary interest in composition and in literacy--let me add a slightly discordant tone.
> Linguistics is a discipline that often takes language apart for the purpose of understanding it and then has a hard time putting it back together again. Though it is full of useful insights, many of those are not available in user friendly form. It seems a contentious discipline that may be undergoing a paradigm shift.
> I don't disagree with anything anyone has said, but wanted to add an additional perspective. I have tried to be an advocate for increased attention to language in the K-16 curriculum and finding it a hard sell.
>
> Craig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu [mailto:funknet-bounces at mailman.rice.edu] On Behalf Of alex gross
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2011 6:26 AM
> To: Sherman Wilcox; Angus Grieve-Smith
> Cc: funknet at mailman.rice.edu
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
>
> I applaud all of your contributions so far and would only add that past theories of linguistics, were they still fashionable, could provide yet other evidence that our study is not only "good for something" but truly lies at the very center of our many cultures.
>
> The Semanticists certainly took this view when they visualized linguistics as a tool we surely need today, nothing less than an ongoing critique of all social, political, and intellectual dialogue, as a way citizens in many societies could distinguish rhetoric from reality.
>
> And the Whorf-Sapir descriptivists have also left us a useful tool that can help us to realize that seemingly distinct cultures and languages, though certainly not connected by any "universal grammar," can nonetheless be seen as ultimately comparable and equal in value to our own. At least this assessment, though allegedly discredited, still lurks on the margins of our study.
>
> I am particularly heartened by Professor Wilcox' contribution, that translators and interpreters also prove that linguistics is "good for something." I am prepared at the drop of a hat to go a great deal further and assert that they lie at the very heart of all language study, as I have done in my paper "Translation as the Prototype of All Communication,"
> accessible at:
>
> http://languag2.home.sprynet.com/f/prototyp.htm#t11
>
> It may well be in all the stages of our learning that every single new word or concept we encounter, even in our primary language, actually requires an act of explanation, enlightenment, clarification--in short translation--for us to understand it. Such an act may be provided by a teacher, a helpful friend, a dictionary or other reference book, or the closer reading of a text. But whatever form it takes, such an act of translation is most often absolutely crucial for us to grasp the meaning. And we ourselves--what we call our "knowledge" and our "understanding"--may be to a fair extent the sum total of these countless acts of translation.
>
> With very best to everyone!
>
> alex
>
> http://language.home.sprynet.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sherman Wilcox" <wilcox at unm.edu>
> To: "Angus Grieve-Smith" <grvsmth at panix.com>
> Cc: <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 9:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
>
>
>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 6:08 PM, Angus Grieve-Smith wrote:
>>
>>> * Linguists
>>> * Computer programmers
>>> * Speech therapists
>>> * Language teachers
>>> * Literary theorists
>>> * Editors
>>> * Lexicographers
>>> * Politicians
>>
>>
>> Interpreters and translators.
>>
>> --
>> Sherman Wilcox, Ph.D.
>> Professor
>> Department of Linguistics
>> University of New Mexico
>> Albuquerque, NM 87131
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 11:08:09 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "Clai Rice" <cxr1086 at louisiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: [FUNKNET] What is linguistics? What is it good for?
> To: <funknet at mailman.rice.edu>
> Message-ID: <6294DCA5A7C74748AA18AB861E08257A at win.louisiana.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>
> I sometimes use a diagram by Neil Smith, from page 5 of Language, Bananas,
> and Bonobos. His introductory essay is titled "How to be the Centre of the
> Universe," and the diagram shows that the study of language pertains
> directly to nearly every discipline in the academy. The diagram, but not
> the whole essay, can be viewed on Amazon's Look Inside function.
>
> Clai Rice
>
>
> End of FUNKNET Digest, Vol 96, Issue 4
> **************************************
More information about the Funknet
mailing list